Nimrod crash in Afghanistan Tech/Info/Discussion (NOT condolences)
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: England
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another report quoted a local tribal chief that flares were being fired shortly before the accident.
a. are fitted?
b. would be fired en masse as an SOP prior to a forced landing?
Imagine that some pyros (such as a marker marine, retro etc) would be carried in case of a divert overwater SAR mission. Any history of these cooking off inside the pressurized fuselage and creating a disposal problem at height? Are any IR decoy flares carried for reloading from internal stocks (i.e.reloading on the ground at a deployment/forward base?).
Apart from the pyros, the high-level problem followed by an emerg descent has all the hallmarks of a land ASAP electrical fire. Either scenario is supported by the indigenous person quoted as saying that there was a fire in the rear of the aircraft shortly before it impacted some few hundreds of yards from him.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: ISK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is, again, common knowledge. Do a Google search (text or image)for "Nimrod BOZ" Or look at pictures of Nimrods on airliners.net ( http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1095476/L/ or http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1010553/L/ for example). Not just fitted to slow them down, you know.....as well as the in-built AN/ALE-40 launcer.
Not being handsome, witty, charming, and well paid (ie Aircrew), couldn't say for sure. I'd like to bloody think so though.
I've never seen pyrotechnics carried internally (such as a marker marine, retro etc), either on training, or in theatre. That's what the bomb bay is for. There is a flare gun in the cockpit, and a small number of coloured flares, but that's it. No big secret there either.
No. Decoy flares are treated as any other explosive, under the usual strict control at the FOB. Not carried internally, even in-theatre.
Speculation. Could be any one of a number of causes. Fuel, conditioning, electrics, pressurisation, heating systems yadda yadda yadda. That's what the BOI will hopefully find out.
b. would be fired en masse as an SOP prior to a forced landing?
Imagine that some pyros (such as a marker marine, retro etc) would be carried in case of a divert overwater SAR mission. Any history of these cooking off inside the pressurized fuselage and creating a disposal problem at height?
Are any IR decoy flares carried for reloading from internal stocks (i.e.reloading on the ground at a deployment/forward base?).
Apart from the pyros, the high-level problem followed by an emerg descent has all the hallmarks of a land ASAP electrical fire. Either scenario is supported by the indigenous person quoted as saying that there was a fire in the rear of the aircraft shortly before it impacted some few hundreds of yards from him.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: England
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Might refocus attention on aromatic polyimide wiring insulation
AKA KAPTON - the Nimrod is full of it
'On-board fire' caused fatal Afghan crash
From correspondents in London
September 04, 2006
THE aircraft crash in Afghanistan that killed 14 British military personnel on Saturday was caused by an on-board fire, it was reported today.
According to The Times, citing an unnamed military source, a short circuit inside the aircraft caused a spark leading to a fire, with smoke engulfing the work stations of the men on board.
Meanwhile, The Sun newspaper reported that fire warning detectors went off, with flames damaging the fuselage and disabling the Nimrod MR2's controls.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence (MoD) would not comment on the reports, saying only that: "The indications are that there was a technical problem of some sort".
The Royal Air Force Nimrod MR2 reconnaissance plane, on a NATO mission, came down in Kandahar province in southern Afghanistan on Saturday.
The military is investigating the disaster, which led to the single biggest loss of British troops in Afghanistan or Iraq since the US-led war on terror was launched in November 2001.
Twelve RAF personnel, a Royal Marine and a British Army soldier were killed.
The incident brings the number of British armed forces personnel deaths in Afghanistan since the start of operations against the hardline Taliban regime in 2001 to 36, including 15 in combat.
Based on the Comet, which more than 50 years ago was the world's first jet airliner, the Nimrod was introduced into RAF service in 1969 and upgraded to the N2 in the 1980s.
'On-board fire' caused fatal Afghan crash
From correspondents in London
September 04, 2006
THE aircraft crash in Afghanistan that killed 14 British military personnel on Saturday was caused by an on-board fire, it was reported today.
According to The Times, citing an unnamed military source, a short circuit inside the aircraft caused a spark leading to a fire, with smoke engulfing the work stations of the men on board.
Meanwhile, The Sun newspaper reported that fire warning detectors went off, with flames damaging the fuselage and disabling the Nimrod MR2's controls.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence (MoD) would not comment on the reports, saying only that: "The indications are that there was a technical problem of some sort".
The Royal Air Force Nimrod MR2 reconnaissance plane, on a NATO mission, came down in Kandahar province in southern Afghanistan on Saturday.
The military is investigating the disaster, which led to the single biggest loss of British troops in Afghanistan or Iraq since the US-led war on terror was launched in November 2001.
Twelve RAF personnel, a Royal Marine and a British Army soldier were killed.
The incident brings the number of British armed forces personnel deaths in Afghanistan since the start of operations against the hardline Taliban regime in 2001 to 36, including 15 in combat.
Based on the Comet, which more than 50 years ago was the world's first jet airliner, the Nimrod was introduced into RAF service in 1969 and upgraded to the N2 in the 1980s.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: ISK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unnamed military source my arse. Pure speculation again.
Please stop it, it's not big, clever, or in any way helpful.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So much for responsible journalists waiting for official info...
Personal experience shows that cooperation of the press with requests for delays in reporting is directly related to closeness of the events to the press in question, and to the press' approval of the actions and the agency taking those actions.
Police matters in the "hometown" nearly always (with a few glaring exceptions) get full cooperation, but military operations overseas which the press in question already oppose (such as is currently the case) rarely get such consideration.
This is from 8 years on active USMC service, and 17 subsequent years of interested and close observation.
Yes, many of the embedded/"frontline" media are responsible and careful in their reporting, but most of what hits the headlines are written by home-office jerks (writers & editors) who let their personal views regulate their coverage. Those embedded types usually only get their stuff published in the "back-page follow-up" sections (or late-night analysis shows on the telly).
And yes, I still remember the BEEB reports from early in OIF on the "bloodthirsty USAF planes bombing schools & hospitals"... which was proven wrong when the ground forces went in.
Did the BEEB apologize or even issue a retraction? No, they just claimed "it still happened, the US must have bribed/intimidated the locals into staying quiet"!
Personal experience shows that cooperation of the press with requests for delays in reporting is directly related to closeness of the events to the press in question, and to the press' approval of the actions and the agency taking those actions.
Police matters in the "hometown" nearly always (with a few glaring exceptions) get full cooperation, but military operations overseas which the press in question already oppose (such as is currently the case) rarely get such consideration.
This is from 8 years on active USMC service, and 17 subsequent years of interested and close observation.
Yes, many of the embedded/"frontline" media are responsible and careful in their reporting, but most of what hits the headlines are written by home-office jerks (writers & editors) who let their personal views regulate their coverage. Those embedded types usually only get their stuff published in the "back-page follow-up" sections (or late-night analysis shows on the telly).
And yes, I still remember the BEEB reports from early in OIF on the "bloodthirsty USAF planes bombing schools & hospitals"... which was proven wrong when the ground forces went in.
Did the BEEB apologize or even issue a retraction? No, they just claimed "it still happened, the US must have bribed/intimidated the locals into staying quiet"!
Last edited by GreenKnight121; 4th Sep 2006 at 04:39.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unnamed military source my arse. Pure speculation again.
Can I ask all the people slagging off the media for "not having any knowledge" what experience they have had of news reporting to base these comments on?
As for using the deaths of so-called colleagues for point-scoring against the media, whatever they have or haven't done, is 100,000 times more disrespectful and sickening than any actions on their part.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop The Speculation And Allow The Grieving!
Please everyone stop all the speculation and slagging off.
Everybody is trying to carry on and do their job. Before anybody writes anything in this forum before the BOI has published they should seriously think of the effect that this conjecture has upon the families and friends of those who died.
Right now there are a lot of people at ISK trying to come to terms with the loss of loved ones and collegues.
Please have the respect to leave the professionals on the BOI to come up with the answers, if in deed they can in the circumstances. It is understandable to want answers right now but they should come given time. Have faith in the system. Those of us left at ISK have to, after all we will be flying again in the old girl soon.
Everybody is trying to carry on and do their job. Before anybody writes anything in this forum before the BOI has published they should seriously think of the effect that this conjecture has upon the families and friends of those who died.
Right now there are a lot of people at ISK trying to come to terms with the loss of loved ones and collegues.
Please have the respect to leave the professionals on the BOI to come up with the answers, if in deed they can in the circumstances. It is understandable to want answers right now but they should come given time. Have faith in the system. Those of us left at ISK have to, after all we will be flying again in the old girl soon.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London
Age: 69
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Green Granite wrote: "had the MOD told the media that it was a Nimrod aircraft and then asked the media not to release that info until the next of kin had been informed, then the media would not have needed to speculate and would have just quoted the request."
No, the media would have immediately reported everything the MOD told them (claiming afterwords that "If we hadn't someone else would have") and then started asking "what are they trying to hide by asking us to withhold this info"!!!!!!!!!!!
No, the media would have immediately reported everything the MOD told them (claiming afterwords that "If we hadn't someone else would have") and then started asking "what are they trying to hide by asking us to withhold this info"!!!!!!!!!!!
The media are very used to working with "Press Embargos" for all sorts of information, from Company Reports through to new advertising campaigns. How do you think those "knowledgeable" reporters suddenly know everything about a new product or a companies record losses or profits within minutes of the news officially being released ?
I think the idea of getting the BBC and ITV reporters "on-side" and reporting things with inside information rather than keeping them in the relative dark would help both the services and the public, as well as earning "brownie points" with the media themselves. One reason given for NOT doing this is that all media outlets should be treated equally, but that just means the relatively good suffer for the sins of the slugs.
[QUOTE=Pontius Navigator;2822364]We fought long and hard even to get immersion suits as the ditching model sustained something like 25g on the cockpit and broke up. At 200 feet you would pile in or climb safely away on one engine.
We got the suits about 1979-80 and Art Stacey proved the aircraft could ditch.
QUOTE]
I must be going senile, but I thought we had them before I left in 78. I also remember that we fought long and hard for the quick don suits as worn by the cloggies.
We got the suits about 1979-80 and Art Stacey proved the aircraft could ditch.
QUOTE]
I must be going senile, but I thought we had them before I left in 78. I also remember that we fought long and hard for the quick don suits as worn by the cloggies.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Norfolk England
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Scotsman
See http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/inte...?id=1302282006
Speculation or MOD "leak" re comments on air/ground crew actions?
JB
Speculation or MOD "leak" re comments on air/ground crew actions?
JB
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
QUOTE]I must be going senile, but I thought we had them before I left in 78. I also remember that we fought long and hard for the quick don suits as worn by the cloggies.[/QUOTE]
Rubic, I said about, it was 27 years ago for . . .
I was there after 1978, you left in 1978 therefore 1978 is a 'fixed' time marker. I am sure you are right, no question of senility.
Rubic, I said about, it was 27 years ago for . . .
I was there after 1978, you left in 1978 therefore 1978 is a 'fixed' time marker. I am sure you are right, no question of senility.
Quick Don Immersion Suits
Time dims the memory, but I seem to recall that although it had been discussed for some time the catalyst for the provision of the QD suits was the Dutch Atlantique ditching on 15 Jan 81, Accident Report Here. I am pretty certain that we did not have them before that incident.
We received the QD suits within a year of this event. I complained at the time about the length of time it was taking to provide them and queried why we did not just buy the US suits (as used by the Dutch) "off the shelf". In the end the Beaufort suit we got was a far superior item, glad they waited in this case.
YS
We received the QD suits within a year of this event. I complained at the time about the length of time it was taking to provide them and queried why we did not just buy the US suits (as used by the Dutch) "off the shelf". In the end the Beaufort suit we got was a far superior item, glad they waited in this case.
YS
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Daily Telegraph, 4 September 2006
As indeed does New Labour, in response to events in Afghanistan and many other places!
"Flames were coming from the tail," said Niaz Mohammed Sarhadi, the district chief of Panj-wayi. "It was flying very high, maybe 10,000ft. As it fell there were flares from both sides." The Taliban spokesman, Abdul Khaliq, claimed the plane had been brought down by a Stinger missile. But Mr Browne told BBC1's Sunday AM: "The Taliban regularly lie in response to events in Afghanistan.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
"Flames were coming from the tail," said Niaz Mohammed Sarhadi, the district chief of Panj-wayi. "It was flying very high, maybe 10,000ft. As it fell there were flares from both sides."
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I imagine that if faced with an emergency landing, one might want to jettison the flares in the air rather than land with them causing greater risk to the crew / emergency crews.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pardon my speculation, but if the technical fault is an electrical one that caused the fire, then...
1. It would be a very brave man who gave the nod for a Nimrod to fly again, ever.
2. We will see a campaign that will dwarf the 'Parliamentary questions...' thread.
1. It would be a very brave man who gave the nod for a Nimrod to fly again, ever.
2. We will see a campaign that will dwarf the 'Parliamentary questions...' thread.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Sir Peter, are you aircrew?
I think you are but a moment's reflection would reveal that we would not have a single aircraft flying if we grounded each fleet after a technical failure.
Comet, Hastings, Buccanneer, Vulcan, F4 and I am sure many more have all had catastrophic failures. Identifiable failures are cureable - at cost. The cost was what grounded the Valiant not the failure.
I think you are but a moment's reflection would reveal that we would not have a single aircraft flying if we grounded each fleet after a technical failure.
Comet, Hastings, Buccanneer, Vulcan, F4 and I am sure many more have all had catastrophic failures. Identifiable failures are cureable - at cost. The cost was what grounded the Valiant not the failure.